Extensible software development services

ABSTRACT

Described herein are methods and systems for providing software development services in a networked software development environment. For instance, instead of performing compilation on a stand-alone desktop computer, software development activities including, compilation are performed by a service provider in response to a general query from a client requester. Such a network desirably has a global view of the source files being processed by various software development tools associated therewith. This global view enables many interesting approaches including the ability to perform analysis and optimizations to the input files not specified by the client requester. Such anticipatory processing may be based on the history and pattern of previous requests and availability of software development tools that the client requester is not aware of, for instance. The service request is submitted to a software development service provider to get back a specified result and non-specified anticipatory results as one of many “hits” in a ranked order.

TECHNICAL FIELD

The field relates to software development processes. More particularly,the field relates to providing software development services via anetwork.

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, software development has been viewed as an activityassociated with individual developers or small groups of developers. Asa result, since desktop computing became widely available, softwaredevelopment has been associated with activity on a workstation or adesktop computer. Accordingly, it is not surprising that currentintegrated software development tools, such as Visual Studio® byMicrosoft® Corporation, are packaged and delivered as client centricapplications. Also, the business models associated with selling softwaredevelopment tools focus on improvements to client-oriented softwaredevelopment. Among the various activities related to the softwaredevelopment process, compiling source code is a very familiar process todevelopers that has not changed substantially over the last few decades.However, in this same period, computational resources including CPU,memory, network bandwidth, etc. that are available for compilation haveincreased dramatically.

As the scale of software development increases and the capabilities ofthe computational resources improve, in particular the capability tocollaborate via network of computers, the view that software developmentis a desktop-based client-centric activity is being challenged. As largeteams need to coordinate activities related to software development,increasingly important parts of the software development process haveshifted to a client-server network environment to enable the use of anetwork of computational resources to process, unify, and coordinate theactivities of multiple teams. Desktop based client solutions that focuson a typical integrated development environment (IDE) (e.g., VisualStudio®, Rational®, etc.) provide limited direct support for suchnetworked software development activity. As a result, much of thesoftware development work is implemented in an ad hoc manner with eachteam recreating its own process, and tools, which can lead to numerousmistakes.

A number of other problems exist with the current desktop-basedclient-centric approach to software development activities. Each time asource file of a software program is processed (e.g., compiled,optimized, analyzed, etc.) during the software development process, itis viewed in isolation. For instance, current compilers do not attemptto understand the relationship between source files compiled today andthose compiled yesterday. Likewise, they do not attempt to reason aboutidentical source files submitted during different build processes.Furthermore, when new tools become available, they have to be explicitlynoticed by the developers and then correctly installed on their desktopmachine to be of any use. This requires the developers to have extensiveknowledge of the availability and the suitability of various softwaredevelopment tools to their tasks. Likewise, developers need to be awareof upgrades to the tools as they become available and install suchupgrades.

The desktop based software development model makes poor use of valuablecomputing resources for one more reason. For instance, development teamsrely on source files containing, not only the source files generated bythem, but also those generated by other team members of the project.Also a large set of software development tools may be deployed for useon the project. Thus, copies of each of the source files that the otherproject team members are working on, as well as copies of the varioussoftware development tools that are deployed, will have to be maintainedon each of the desktop machines of a software development team. Also, asnew software development tools are deployed, they too have to beinstalled and managed, thus requiring additional computing resources andtime.

The process of bringing together the various components of a softwareapplication developed on different desktop machines also can be errorprone and require an inordinate amount of effort by the developers. Thisis so because even the slightest variations in the desktop machines leadto problems during the build process. Correct builds require complexbuild environments to be replicated as closely as possible on manydifferent desktops. However, many of the dependencies between thesoftware components and the environment (e.g., registry entries,versions, etc.) in which they are built are implicit and hard toenumerate in order to replicate the environment wholly during the buildprocess.

Thus, there is a need for an improved software development model,wherein software development activities, such as compiling, analyzing,and building software are implemented through a network of machines.

SUMMARY

Described herein are methods and systems for providing softwaredevelopment services in a network of computers. In one aspect, requestsfor software development services from developer clients are processedto return results that are specified by the developers. In anotheraspect, the service providers anticipate other results related to otherprocessing of the requests not specified and thus, not expected bydeveloper clients. For instance, a request addressed to a serviceprovider by a developer client to compile a source code file in order toreceive a corresponding object file is responded to with results notonly having the object file as expected but also, other resultscomprising other processing of the source code that may be of interestto the developer client. Such additional processing may include suchactivities as applying software analysis and code optimization methodsnot specified by the developer client in the original request. In fact,in one aspect, the developer client may not even be aware of theapplicability and availability of the additional analysis andoptimizations.

In one other aspect, the results not specified by the clients aregenerated based on knowledge retained from previous requests. Forinstance, a previous pattern of requests from a selected group ofdeveloper clients may be analyzed to provide results for a laterrequest.

In yet another aspect, requests from developer clients to serviceproviders are method calls that comprise an identifier of an input fileto be processed, at least one expected result of the processing and aspecification of at least one software development tool to be used inthe requested processing. In yet another aspect, at least one resultgenerated by the service provider is based on applying a softwaredevelopment tool not specified in the request from the developer client.

In another aspect, the service provider is further capable ofdetermining a ranking of the various expected and unexpected results sothat results can be presented in a ranked order to indicate theimportance of some results over others. Alternatively, the expectedresults are excluded from the ranked order. The foregoing and otherobjects, features, and advantages of the invention will become moreapparent from the following detailed description, which proceeds withreference to the accompanying figures.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating an exemplary overall system forproviding software development services over a computer network.

FIG. 2 is a flow diagram describing an exemplary overall method ofproviding software development services over a computer network.

FIG. 3 is a flow diagram describing an exemplary method of providingsoftware development services over a network based on informationretained from previous processing of requests for providing theservices.

FIG. 4 is a flow diagram describing an exemplary method of providingsoftware development services over a network wherein softwaredevelopment tools not specified by the client service requester areapplied to generate at least one unexpected result.

FIG. 5A is a block diagram at least in part illustrating an exemplarysystem for providing software development services over a networkcomprising exemplary memory locations for storing input files and filesrelated to processed results.

FIG. 5B is a block diagram at least in part illustrating an exemplarysystem for providing software development services over a networkcomprising an exemplary global memory location for storing input filesand files related to processed results.

FIG. 6 is a block diagram illustrating a flow of events during anexemplary processing of an exemplary request for providing softwaredevelopment requests.

FIG. 7 is a flow diagram describing an exemplary method of providingsoftware development services wherein cache memory locations (e.g., suchas in FIGS. 5A-B) are used to avoid re-computing results for a softwaredevelopment service request by retrieving previously computed results.

FIG. 8 is a flow diagram describing an exemplary method of avoidingunnecessary transmissions when retrieving results of a request forsoftware development services.

FIG. 9 is a flow diagram describing an exemplary method of generating areproducible environment for executing software.

FIG. 10 is a block diagram depicting a general-purpose computing deviceconstituting an exemplary system for implementing the disclosedtechnology.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION An Exemplary Overall Method of Providing SoftwareDevelopment Services

FIG. 1 illustrates a framework 100 for software development process(e.g., compilation) that is better suited for maximizing the utility andthe capabilities of computational resources in a network environment.For instance, instead of thinking of compilation as a mechanicaltransformation from a source to an executable on a stand alone desktopcomputer, the model of FIG. 1 illustrates software developmentactivities including, for instance, compilation as a specific instanceof a general query from a client requester 110 (the developer) over thenetwork 130 to a software development service provider 120 (e.g., acompiler). The compilation process is implemented as a request submittedto a software development engine to get back the compiled object code asone of many “hits” or results (e.g. 150).

In FIG. 1, the client submits a request 140 to the software developmentservice provider server 120 (hereafter referred to as a provider server)an input file comprising, for instance, a unit of source code of aprogram (a main file, a function, classes, etc.) along with whateverexecution context is necessary to process the input. The request alsospecifies an expected result from the processing. Execution contextincludes but is not limited to specification of the operating system onwhich to conduct the operation, paths to header files that may beneeded, paths to include files, and so on. The expected result specifiedin a request for compilation service by a software development tool maybe a compiled version of the source (e.g., “foo.obj” may be a specifiedresult expected from processing of a “foo.c” input file).

However, there are many different ways in which a source file can becompiled, including, for instance, according to different optimizationgoals (e.g., optimizing memory, time, etc.). Furthermore, there could beother results of other processing of the input source file related tothe request 140 that may also be of interest to the client requester110. For instance, the software development service provider 120 mayapply tools (e.g., analyzers, compilers, optimizers, etc.) that are notspecified by the requester 110 in their request 140. In fact, therequesting developer may not even be aware of such possibilities. Thus,in addition to getting the specified result 150, the client requester110 may also receive one or more results 160 not specified by therequester 110.

FIG. 2 describes an overall method 200 of providing such softwaredevelopment services wherein, at 210, the service provider 120 of FIG. 1receives a software development service request comprising an indicationof the result specified 150 by the requester (e.g., 110 in FIG. 1).However, at 220, the service provider returns not only the resultspecified by the requester 110 of FIG. 1, but at least one other result160 that is not specified by the requester 110.

In a networked software development environment the service provider 120has a global view of all the source files being processed by varioussoftware development tools associated therewith. For instance, it has aview of many different requests for compiled source code across time andorganization. This global view enables many interesting approachesincluding avoiding duplication of computing results related to the samerequest and the ability to perform targeted static analysis andoptimization based on the history and pattern of requests. A softwaredevelopment service will see the array of requests presented across anorganization and with such a global view many economies are possible.For instance, frequent requests and their results can be stored to avoidre-computation. Also, by being aware of the frequent requests,additional optimization and analysis resources can be focused on thesemost frequent requests. Additional safety analysis, includinghigher-cost static analysis and additional checks performed by compilertransformations to preserve correctness can be applied to those selectedsets of most frequent requests.

Furthermore, the overhead of investigating a new analysis is greatlydecreased, because much of the information that would otherwise bedistributed is centralized. For example, duplicated code or code thatdiffers in minor ways submitted from multiple sources could be flaggedfor potential reuse. Code could be globally analyzed for issues relatedto appropriate content, relation to external code bases, etc.

In addition to avoiding re-computation of results for similar requests,duplication of the efforts related to identifying bugs in code andcorresponding fixes too can be avoided. For instance, if changes to thesource code to fix bugs are noted by a software development service 120,patches to fix a bug in one variant of a common code base could be madevisible to the maintainers of other variants automatically.

Data related to patterns of requests from individual groups can be usedto anticipate results needed by the client requester 110. Thus, if amajority of the time (based on some appropriate threshold number),requests from a group involves applying software development tools inthe context of 8 different targets and suppose, in one instance, arequest from the same group occurs where only 7 targets are specified(for example, because a developer forgot to do one), this kind ofdeparture from noticeable patterns might be flagged by the serviceprovider 120. Thus, one type of result 160 that is an unexpectedaddition to the result specified by the requester 150 of such an offpattern software development service request may be one wherein therequest is processed to apply the software development tool to 8different targets in addition to the applying the 7 different targetsfor generating the specified results 150.

According to the method 300 described with reference to FIG. 3, thesoftware development service provider 120 responds to service requestsby a client requester 110 more efficiently by basing the results (e.g.,150 and 160) on results provided previously for similar or relatedrequests from the same requester or another related requester.Accordingly, at 310, the software development service provider 120analyzes service requests in comparison to previous service requests andthus, the knowledge from previous requests can then be used to provideexpected results at 320, as well as unexpected results at 330.

Furthermore, providing software development services in a centralizedmanner allows new tools and analyses to be made available automaticallyand in a manner that is transparent to the developers associated withthe client requester 110. Improvements to code analyses or codecompilation can take place without the knowledge or action on part ofthe client 110 requesting the service. For instance, the code simulationanalysis tool PREfast by Microsoft does not have to be installed on theclient 110 for the results of a PREfast analysis to be available to thedeveloper using the client. Going even further, the developer need noteven be aware of the PREFast tool to prospectively receive results ofits analysis. Thus, according to the method 400 of FIG. 4, softwaredevelopment services are provided by using not only the tools specifiedin a request at 410 but also using other tools available to servicesthat are not specified in the request, at 420 and one that thedevelopers initiating the request may not even be aware of.

The framework for providing software development services illustrated inFIG. 1 centralizes computational resources in a way that can much moreeasily benefit from improvements in technology and supports thescalability of software development capabilities. Using a server farm tohandle all compilation and program analysis means that individualdeveloper's machines do not require upgrades, etc. when new developmentsoftware is installed. Likewise, the computational resources needed tosupport compilation and program analysis are shared and efficiently usedwithin this framework.

Furthermore, with availability of the broader view of a service requestas mentioned above, the results generated by the various softwaredevelopment tools (both specified 150 and unspecified 160) could beranked, just as a search engines rank results of queries. For instance,results of high-value tools could be ranked higher to make such resultsmore likely to be visible to a developer associated with the clientrequester 110.

An Exemplary System for Providing Software Development Services

FIGS. 5A and 5B illustrate exemplary systems for providing softwaredevelopment tools in a network environment. In FIG. 5A, the system 500comprises a network of client requesters 510 comprising one or morerequesters (e.g., 510 a and 510 b) which are sources of high-levelrequests that prompt a response from the software development serviceprovider 520. The client requesters (e.g., 510 a and 510 b) areresponsible for building the requests and receiving and displayingresponses, for instance. In one exemplary implementation, a web browser(e.g., Internet Explorer by Microsoft® Corporation) could be used toimplement the user-interface for the client requester (e.g., 510 a and510 b). The format of the request is described further in anothersection below. The software development service provider server 520 isthe component responsible for receiving, coordinating the processing,and responding to requests from the client requester (e.g., 510 a and510 b).

The main server 520 associated with the service provider is furthercommunicative with a request processor component 530 which is desirablyoperable for analyzing the request and determining what responses areappropriate. For instance, based on previously processed requests, therequest processor 530 generates one or more additional requests forgenerating results not specified and thus, not expected by the clientrequestor (e.g., 510 a and 510 b). These results include but are notlimited to results from applying tools other than those specifiedoriginally by the requester or offering processing enhancements such ascode fixes and security patches that the developer may not otherwise beaware of. The list of requests is then submitted to the provider server520 and to the build server 540.

The build server component 540 is desirably responsible for building theresponse for the request by creating an appropriate executionenvironment, and running the software development tool with thespecified input. The results of such executions of the softwaredevelopment tool are the results associated with the request. Suchresults can be those specified and thus, expected by a requestor (e.g.,150) and those not specified and thus, unexpected by a requestor (e.g.,160).

The service provider cache component 550 is responsible forintelligently caching request-response pairs. Thus, the system 500 iscapable of determining whether a result for a particular request hasbeen computed in the past and using the stored result in order to avoidre-computing the result. In one implementation, a table ofresult-response pairs is maintained in the provider cache 550, forinstance.

An exemplary request is handled as follows:

-   -   1. A client request is sent to the request processor 530, which        generates one-or-more additional requests.    -   2. For each request from the request processor 530, the provider        cache 550 is consulted to determine if the result is already        stored in the cache 550, in which case, it is retrieved.    -   3. For each request whose result is not stored in the provider        cache 550, the build server 540 is invoked, whereby the result        is generated by executing the appropriate tool in the specified        environment. When the result is generated, it is stored in the        provider cache 550 for future retrieval.

Those results that have been computed as results of the request arereturned to the client requester (e.g., 510 a and 510 b) and also,stored in the client requester cache (e.g., 560 a and 560 b) for laterretrieval. Thus, if and when another request is originated at a latertime, the client side caches (e.g., 560 a and 560 b) are first examinedto determine whether results for the request in question are storedthereon before incurring the transmission costs related to obtaining theresults from the service provider.

As shown in FIG. 5B, in addition to having the provider cache 550 andthe client side caches 560 a-b, a global cache or database at 570 mayalso be consulted to obtain the result for a particular request. Thismay be useful in allowing access to results generated by a third party.

The components described above with respect to their functionalityillustrate one particular implementation. The various functionalitiesmay be distributed differently among these and other components, notshown, without departing from the principles of the technology describedherein. Also, the classification of a computer as a client (e.g., 510a-b) or a server (e.g., 520, 530, 540 and 550) in the exemplary networkdescribed herein is for illustration purposes. Their roles areinterchangeable. For instance, any of the functionalities describedherein with reference to the server side of the network (e.g., 520, 530,540 and 550) can also be implemented on the client (e.g., 510 a-b) andvice versa.

An Exemplary Processing of a Client Request for Software DevelopmentServices

FIG. 6 illustrates how the various components of the system architecturedescribed above interact to process a client request for softwaredevelopment services. The illustration shows the various exchanges ofdata between the components as time progresses. According to the exampleillustrated in FIG. 6, an initial client request at 610 is presented tothe provider server at 620 and the request 610 is then submitted to therequest processor 630 for processing. Based on the availability and theappropriateness of applying additional tools or additional processing,for instance, the request processor 630 generates two other requests 635and 640. Later, it is determined that the provider cache 645 has storedwithin it results related to the second request at 646. Therefore, onlyrequests 1 and 3 are passed on to the build server 650. Once the resultsrelated to requests 1 and 3 are computed by the build server 650, theresults for requests 1, 2, and 3 are presented to the client requester605. These results need not be presented to the client requester 605simultaneously. Also, indicators of the results may first be presentedto the client requester 605 prior to sending the actual results to theclient to minimize the amount of data sent over the network.Furthermore, the results for the requests 1 and 3 may also be added tothe provider cache at 647 in a manner suitable for later identificationand retrieval. These methods are described in further detail below.

An Exemplary Method of Caching Service Request Results

In a client-server framework for providing software development servicesthe provider server (520 of FIGS. 5A-B) may receive the same servicerequests from different requesters or the same request from the samesource but at different times. Thus, it would be advantageous for theprovider to maintain a record of the results to avoid re-computing theresults each time the same request is received. Also, since at leastsome results may comprise a large amount of data, before a clientrequests the transmission of the contents of the results for a requestit has generated, it would be beneficial to review a cache memoryassociated with it (e.g., 560 a or 560 b) to determine whether italready has such a result. In this manner, unnecessary transmission ofdata can be avoided. Thus, according to the method 700 of FIG. 7,information related to request-result pairs is stored in cache on boththe server side (e.g., at 570 of FIG. 5B) and the client side (e.g., 560a or 560 b) and these cache memory locations are consulted prior tocomputing and/or retrieving the results for each request to avoidunnecessary computations and unnecessary transmissions.

An exemplary method 700 of maintaining such cache memories is describedfurther with reference to FIG. 7. At 710, the provider server (520)receives a request. However, at 720, based at least on the nature of therequest received by the client requester (e.g., 510 a or 510 b) therequester processor (530) may generate additional requests that it deemsmay be of interest to the developer. These additional requests whencomputed will yield results that are not specified by and thus, notexpected (e.g., see 160 of FIG. 1) by the original requester (e.g., 510a or 510 b). At 730, the provider server (520) examines the providercache (550) to determine whether results related to any of the originalrequests and those generated by the request processor (530) are storedtherein. At 740, those results not stored in the provider cache (550)are calculated and saved therein. Later at 750, the results specified byand thus, expected by the original requester (e.g., 510 a or 510 b), aswell as the results not specified by and thus, not expected by theoriginal requester (e.g., 510 a or 510 b), are presented to the originalrequester. If at 730, it is determined that all of the results (bothexpected and unexpected) are present in the provider cache (550) thecomputation step at 740 can be avoided.

Alternatively, a global memory location (e.g., 570 of FIG. 5B) with arepository of results related to software development service requests(e.g., 570 of FIG. 5B) may also be consulted in addition to or even inlieu of consulting the provider cache 550.

An Exemplary Interface for Interactions Between a Client Requester and aSoftware Development Service Provider

An exemplary interface is provided as described below to allow theclient requester (e.g., 510 a or 510 b of FIGS. 5A-B) to call thesoftware development service provider server (520). The exemplaryrequest interface is a method call that specifies an input file to beprocessed (e.g., foo.c) and a description of at least one specificresult (e.g., foo.obj). Additionally, a description of a hostenvironment or a context, which includes but is not limited toinformation such as environment variables, operating system version,registry settings, architecture specification, paths to include files inwhich the response will be computed from the request (e.g., x86,WinXPSP2, cl v8.1, path to headers, etc.) can also be specified in thecall. A transformation rule that specifies how the result is computedfrom the input, such as *.c->*.o: cl &.c may also be specified.Additionally, the tool to be applied for generating the expected resultis also specified. In the absence of the host environment or context,the provider server (520 of FIGS. 5A-B) will determine the hostenvironment needed to compute the results.

A specific exemplary implementation of the client-server interface maybe a single applicative interface as follows:

-   -   code, outputs=apply (tool, arguments, inputs)        The variable “tool” names a software development tool (e.g., a C        compiler); “arguments” is a list of strings that specify options        to “tool” (e.g., environment or context in which to execute the        tool); and “inputs” is a list of input files (e.g., C source and        header files). The “apply” method returns two values, an exit        code, and a list of output files. The value of “code” is used to        indicate success or failure of the “apply” method. Outputs may        include files that hold the standard output and standard error        files from executing the tool, which usually contain diagnostics        when tools fail.

An Exemplary Method of Identifying Files for Storage and Retrieval

Appropriate memory locations (e.g., 560 a-b and 550) can be searched toavoid having to unnecessarily re-compute results of software developmentactivities and/or to avoid unnecessary transmission of input filesand/or files comprising results of software development service requests(e.g., between a client requester (e.g., 510 a and 510 b of FIGS. 5A-B)and a provider server (520)). In order to make such memory locationsdeterministically searchable, something other than, or in addition to,the conventional user-assigned files names are needed to identify thestored files. This is so, for instance, because user-assigned file namesin two different client machines, and sometimes in the same clientmachine, can refer to different software artifacts and thus, underminingthe accuracy of any searches. One exemplary method of naming orassigning identifiers to a file (e.g., input or output files of aservice request) that unambiguously identifies the file is based on acontent-based fingerprint of the file. One implementation of such anidentifier is a triple based file identifier that comprises thefollowing:

Triple=(alias, fingerprint, url)

Desirably, the file fingerprint is a unique content based hash (e.g.,Rivest-MD5 or a SHA-1 class of algorithms for determining a fingerprintof the contents of the file can be used). Desirably, the url is ahyperlink to a memory location (e.g., in one of the cache memorylocations 560 a-b, 550, and 570) from which the file can be fetched, ifneeded. Desirably, the alias is a local name for the file which can beused when “tool” is invoked, so that a software development tool orother applications can refer to the files by conventional names insteadof the typically longer triples. Because the contents of the files beingidentified are hashed, the triple becomes an identifier that is uniqueto the file. A suitable portion of the content on which to base the hashcan be varied in accordance with the desired strength of the hash'suniqueness. Desirably, identical files will have identical hashes.Desirably, non-identical files can have an identical hash with a lowprobability of a match. To positively and unambiguously determine that atarget file is the same as the expected file, the file fingerprint ofthe target file must equal the expected file fingerprint.

The alias and the url are additional components that provide additionalconvenience. With the url location, for instance, the output filerelated to a client request is accessible to a client. If the clientdetermines, based on the file fingerprint that such a result is notavailable in its own cache, the client can access the output filethrough the url location. Thus, the use of url's avoids unnecessarytransmission of files. The same applies to a provider server receiving afingerprint identifying an input file to which it needs to apply asoftware development tool.

Alternatively, as needed, the alias and/or the url can be selectivelyexcluded to form a file identifier, such as a tuple comprising a filefingerprint and an url location of the file, which is still a uniqueidentifier of the file so long as the file fingerprint is retained. Theinputs and outputs lists of a request are lists of such triples ortuples comprising the unique file fingerprint identifier, for instance.Both client and server caches (560 a-b and 550) can maintain one or moretables of files indexed by the triples or a portion thereof.

If the url is not part of a unique identifier of input or output files,for instance, by convention, it may be agreed that such files can beretrieved from a memory location (e.g., the global location 570) wherethe files are stored according to an index, based at least on theircontent-based fingerprint. In another implementation, the url can bebased at least in part on the file fingerprint.

Exemplary Methods of Avoiding Unnecessary Computation and Transmissions

To avoid unnecessary downloads of results, for instance, as described inFIG. 8, the client requester (e.g., 510 a or 510 b of FIGS. 5A-B) at 810receives a presentation of the results comprising one or more fileidentifiers comprising file fingerprints that correspondingly identifyresults related to requests. However, before downloading the filesrelated to the results, at 820, based at least on some portion of thefile identifiers, such as a fingerprint hash of the results, the clientrequester (e.g., 510 a or 510 b) will search the registry of the clientcache (e.g., 560 b) for the presence of the results. At 830, the clientrequests transmission of only those result files for which it does notfind a match. In determining a match, the file fingerprint hash of theresult files indicated by the service provider (520) has to match thatof a file stored in the client cache (560 a-b), which ensures that theircontents are sufficiently the same. The level of confidence in thisdetermination is adjustable to the extent that the strength of thecontent-based hashing is also adjustable. Furthermore, files mayinitially be matched based on their alias and a match may later beconfirmed by matching the file fingerprint hash of the files.Unnecessary transmission of content of input files for softwaredevelopment related processing can be also avoided in a similar mannerby first transmitting the file identifier comprising the filefingerprint (e.g., the triple) of the input files.

A fingerprint hash of files can also be used to avoid unnecessaryre-computation of results related to software development requests. Inone implementation, a table of request-result pairs is maintained in asearchable memory location (e.g., 560 a-b, 550, and 570) wherein therequest-result pairs are uniquely identified based at least in part on afingerprint of an input file specified in the processed request. Forinstance, a software development service request can specify one or moreinput files using a fingerprint hash of the input file. A specificationof a software development tool and an execution environment forexecuting the software development tool can also be specified in therequest. Thus, once results related to such requests are computed, theymay be stored in memory (e.g., 560 a-b, 550, and 570) in one or moretables indexed according to a unique mapping of the request-result pairsbased at least on a fingerprint of the input files. In this manner, alater request that is similar to a previously processed request can beidentified and its results can be retrieved from memory and thus,avoiding re-computation.

The unique request-result mapping may also be based on additionalinformation related to the requests, such as the software developmenttools specified in the request. The specification of a softwaredevelopment tool can also include a specification of an executionenvironment for executing the tool. Alternatively, different tables canbe maintained for different tools and thus, obviating the need forindexing the request-result pair mappings based on software developmenttools specified in a request.

Exemplary Methods of Avoiding Re-Computation Related to SoftwareDevelopment Activities on a Single Computer

The unique file identifiers based on a content-based file fingerprint(e.g., the file content hash, the triples or the tuples describedherein) also can be used on a stand-alone machine to avoidre-computation of results related to software development activities,such as compilation. For instance, once a file identifier is used touniquely identify and store the request-result pairs of softwaredevelopment activities (e.g., compilation), a later request for the samecomputation originating on the same machine on the same input file canbe avoided by first searching an indexed table of stored results filesof previous computations.

Exemplary Requests for Software Development Services

Requests for software developments services can be implemented inseveral forms. For instance, specification of the input files caninclude the actual files. Such specification of input files also can bein form of a unique identifier of the file, such as a content-based filefingerprint. The specification can also include some indicator of alocation of the file (e.g., an url). The location may be in a cachememory location local to the computer originating the request (e.g., 560a-b in FIG. 5A-B) and accessible to the target of the request. Suchlocations may also be elsewhere, such as in a global location accessibleto other computers on the network (e.g., 570 in FIG. 5B). The requestcan also include some combination of the file identifier (e.g., a filefingerprint), the file location indicator (e.g., url) and the actualfile.

Exemplary Processing and Presentation of Results Related to Requests forSoftware Development Services

Re-computation of results can be avoided by verifying whether aparticular request was previously processed. Results can be presented toa requester in several forms. For instance, the actual result files canbe presented to the requester. Alternatively, an identifier of theresult files (e.g., file fingerprint) can be presented so that therequester can determine whether the transmission of the results files isnecessary. Some indicator of a location of the result file also can bepresented. The location can be in a local cache (e.g., 550 of FIGS.5A-B) or even at a global location (e.g., 570 of FIG. 5B). Resultscomputed for the first time are stored in one of these memory locationsto be accessed later to avoid re-computation. Results may also bepresented as some combination of the actual results, identifiers of theresult files (e.g., file fingerprint), and an indicator of the locationof the results files.

An Exemplary Illustration of Processing of an Input File According to aSoftware Development Service Request

Here is a simple example of processing of a request for compilationservices related to a C language source code file that illustrates theinteraction between a client requester (e.g., 510 a or 510 b of FIG. 5),a provider server (520), their caches (e.g., 560 a-b and 550), and filesstored therein. The following three files in Table 1 implement thetypical “hello world” program in the programming language C.

TABLE 1 hello.h: extern void hello(char *); hello.c: #include “hello.h”#include <stdio.h> void hello(char *msg) {    printf(msg); } main.c:#include “hello.h” void main(void) {    hello(“hello world\n”); }A client requester (e.g., 510 a or 510 b), running on a machine named“drh2” issues a call to the provider server as shown in table 2, below.

TABLE 2 apply(cc, [ ‘-c’ ] [ (‘hello.c’,‘ee1dd4f2dd9548d63864805bc94c10f5’,   ‘http://drh2/client/cache/ee1dd4f2dd9548d63864805bc94c10f5.content’), (‘hello.h’, ‘3cece125588265fa53eaab115db709bd’,   ‘http://drh2/client/cache/3cece125588265fa53eaab115db709bd.   content’)] )Generally, the call in table 2 requests results of compilation by a Ccomplier of input files “hello.c” and “hello.h.” Square brackets denotelists. Argument is the one-element list holding a parameter “-c” whichis passed to the specified tool “cc” to indicate that the softwaredevelopment service requested relates to producing a compiled objectfile “.obj”, for instance. The urls in the input triples point directlyto the files in the client's cache (e.g., 560 a-b). So, for instance, ift he server does not already have the input file identified by the filefingerprint hash “ee1dd4f2dd9548d63864805bc94c10f5,” it fetches it fromthe location identified by the locator“http://drh2/client/cache/ee1dd4f2dd9548d63864805bc94c10J5.content”.Such locations may also be a third party administered global location(e.g., 570 of FIG. 5B), as well as ones directly associated with theclient requester (e.g., 560 a-b). The software development toolspecified here (C compiler “cc”) is invoked with the input files,including “hello.h” in this example, because the server may not be awareof all of the tool-specific details, such as any include files. In thisinstance, the provider server (520) retrieves the input files from theclient cache (e.g., 560 a-b) and stores it in its own cache and invokesthe software development tool with the arguments and the input files, asspecified in the request.

For this example, the outputs list returned by the provider server (520)is as shown in table 3, below.

TABLE 3 [(‘.stderr’, ‘d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e’,    ‘http://pls-ts/lathe/server/cache/d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e.content’),(‘.stdout’, ‘62a2757d4f65f2786daae0134994746a’,    ‘http://pls-ts/lathe/server/cache/62a2757d4f65f2786daae0134994746a.content’),(‘hello.obj’, ‘23a1ad20c3ea5fe71179bc76dcaab433’,    ‘http://pls-ts/lathe/server/cache/23a1ad20c3ea5fe71179bc76dcaab433.content’)]

Referring to table 3 above, the first two files hold the standard errorand standard output from the command, and the third holds the objectcode generated for the “hello.c” input file. The urls point to files inthe server's cache, which resides on a machine named “pls-ts.” Theclient requester (e.g., 510 a or b) can fetch the files from the givenurls, if necessary, and copy the first two files to its own cache (e.g.,560 a-b). When the command completes, there is a “hello.obj” file inclient cache (e.g., 560 a-b) just as if the “hello.c” was compiledlocally at the client.

The following table 4 lists three service requests that together requestthe build of an executable file corresponding to the compiled “hello.c”as “hello.exe,” interleaved with the file transfers from the clientrequester (e.g., 510 a-b) to the provider server (520) indicated by “>>”and vice versa indicated by “<<.” This exemplary trace below in table 4omits the urls from the file fingerprint transfers, for simplicity.

TABLE 4 cc -c hello.c hello.h    >>hello.cee1dd4f2dd9548d63864805bc94c10f5    >>hello.h3cece125588265fa53eaab115db709bd    <<.stderrd41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e    <<.stdout62a2757d4f65f2786daae0134994746a    <<hello.objd7f8c3b28f10eec6d4d8d3cd8766c7bc hello.c cc -c main.c hello.h   >>main.c 3f456f4b65a27be3e26ecaeb7ec9ca47    <<.stdout7e7cb3e5e364ea6193ecd7f69a610661    <<main.obj753a650306f0a979a0e12e9e9cf39794 main.c cc -out:hello.exe main.objhello.obj    <<hello.exe f23c1f065232492bb0e03f30129562b4

Referring to table 4, once the “hello.c” file is compiled to generate“hello.obj,” both the client requester (e.g., 510 a or b) and theprovider server (520) start using cached files. Thus, when “main.c” iscompiled later, as above in table 4, the provider server (520) alreadyhas “hello.h,” so it is not transferred from the client requester (e.g.,510 a or b). Likewise, the client requester (e.g., 510 a or b) alreadyhas the standard error file (which is empty). Further, below for thethird command “cc-out:hello.exe main.obj hello.obj” in table 4, theserver has what it needs to link the two object files “hello.obj” and“main.obj” so it fetches nothing. Both the standard error and outputfrom the third command “cc-out:hello.exe main.obj hello.obj” are empty,and the client already has an empty file from the first command “cc-chello.c hello.h.” This example above is built in steps to illustrate theinteraction between the client requester (e.g., 510 a or b) and theprovider server (520), but the program can be built with a singlecommand, as shown below in table 5.

TABLE 5 cc -out:hello.exe main.c hello.c hello.h    <<.stdoute32602d50f315b6e62e9485191b10f9f    <<hello.exe341f2da379fa2230c8b29ab9f58374cb    <<hello.obj55e90f19d2473259dcc14fb5eacc354a    <<main.objcc935d7ea574a454049e9da3b868fe1d main.c hello.c Generating Code...

The client requester (e.g., 510 a-b) and provider server (520) mayalready have suitable copies of “hello.exe,” “hello.obj,” and“main.obj,” so this request “cc-out:hello.exe main.c hello.c hello.h”above in table 5 coming after the requests in table 4 should cause justthe standard output “.stdout” to actually be transmitted.

The software development requests are applicative. Thus, given a set ofarguments and inputs, a tool always returns the same outputs. The serversaves results of the requests and returns these saved results wheneverpossible. Clients requesting services cannot determine if the resultsthey receive are from a previous or a new invocation of a request forsoftware development service. Also, if the same results had beentransmitted to the requesting client previously, then the results arenot re-transmitted. Instead, just an indication of the previoustransmission may be sent back as a response to the request. For example,table 6 below displays the results of re-executing the command“cc-out:hello.exe main.c hello.c hello.h.”

TABLE 6 cc -out:hello.exe main.c hello.c hello.h main.c hello.cGenerating Code...Here, the requesting client already has these outputs as results fromthe previous computation (e.g., at table 5), so nothing is transferred.

The order of the arguments and inputs matter when the server looks forsaved results, and the file fingerprints in the input triples are usedfor matching the request-result pairs. For instance, the arguments andinputs from the command above “cc-out:hello.exe main.c hello.c hello.h”in table 5 and table 6 are reduced as shown in table 7, below.

TABLE 7 cc -out:hello.exe 3f456f4b65a27be3e26ecaeb7ec9ca47ee1dd4f2dd9548d63864805bc94c10f5 3cece125588265fa53eaab115db709bdIn this example, the server saves only the alias and file fingerprintsfrom the outputs, e.g., for this example, it saves “.stderr,” “.stdout,”“hello.exe,” “hello.obj,” and “main.obj” as shown in table 8, below.

TABLE 8 .stderr d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e .stdoute32602d50f315b6e62e9485191b10f9f hello.exe341f2da379fa2230c8b29ab9f58374cb hello.obj55e90f19d2473259dcc14fb5eacc354a main.obj cc935d7ea574a454049e9da3b868fe1d

The provider server need not save the results for commands that fail,(e.g., those that return a nonzero result for “code” in the applymethod, described above) on the assumption that failure may be a resultof external factors. The worst-case effect of this approach is thatcommands that fail are re-executed. Client requesters and providerserver save the files that appear in the inputs and outputs, sore-invoking a tool or invoking a tool with the arguments or inputs in adifferent order often results in no file transfers.

Using applicative tools and saving invocation results makes itunnecessary to use timestamps to avoid doing redundant work in buildscripts. A script can be executed from top to bottom—only the toolinvocations that are needed are actually executed.

An Exemplary Reproducible Build Service

Re-computing results related to software development services can beavoided by appropriately naming and retrieving results related tospecific service requests. In order to rely on results saved in cachememories (e.g., 560 a-b and 550) it is essential to ensure that theresult would have been the same whether it was re-computed or retrievedfrom a cache memory. However, each instance of applying a softwaredevelopment tool (by different computers or at different times by thesame computers) yields different results. Thus, application of softwaredevelopment tools is not predictably and dependably reproducible. Theproblem of lack of reproducibility in applying software tools occursbecause the software tools are complex applications themselves that havemany explicit and implicit dependencies on the hardware and softwarecontext in which they run. Software context includes but is not limitedto such information as, the operating system version, what otherapplications have been installed on the computer executing the tool,what registry entries exist at the time the tool is used, what securitypatches have been installed, and what user environment variables existand what their values are.

Such software execution context is quite expansive and very difficult tofully enumerate explicitly. Each developer may execute a compiler in adifferent context, for instance. A developer compiling a file on onemachine may generate a different object file than a developer compilingthe same file on a different machine. Even worse, the same developer mayget a different result compiling the same file on the same machine justat a later time (e.g., after a new software has been installed or asecurity patch installed). For instance, a compiler may vary thealgorithm it uses to generate code based on the amount of physicalmemory present in the machine in which it runs or it may choose to varythe algorithm based on the amount of virtual memory currently availableto the process (a quantity that is constantly changing over time).

A common practice among software developers is called a “buddy build”where a developer asks a fellow developer to build the software theyhave written on their machine to identify potentially unknowndependencies on the system context in which the software was originallydeveloped. This ad hoc approach to identifying implicit dependenciesconsumes an inordinate amount of time and computing resources, and yetdoing a buddy build remains a common practice throughout the softwareindustry.

As described herein are methods and systems that ensure that anexecution context in one computer at a particular time can be capturedand saved. Once saved, it can be replicated in as many other computersat any other time or at the same computer at a later time to ensure thatdifferences in the execution contexts is not a factor in determining theresults of executing any software. In the context of the methods andsystems for providing software development services, it ensures thatsaved results for service requests, once computed on a computer with anexecution environment that is specified, can be ensured to be the sameas if it was re-computed.

Suppose a repository exists (e.g., a source code depot) that can be usedto store software artifacts with associated version information. Astandard file system could be used as the repository. Further supposethat software tools exist that take software artifacts as inputs andproduce software artifacts as results and that they are deterministic,that is, given the same exact hardware and software context and the sameinputs, they will produce the same result.

To create a reproducible software execution context for softwaredevelopment tools a Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM), such as the VirtualPC by Microsoft Corporation, and the VMware Workstation by EMCCorporation can be used. These VMMs provide for invoking one or moresoftware virtual machines that, among other things, emulate anunderlying hardware. Thus, using such VMMs, multiple virtual machinesrunning multiple different execution contexts, including differentoperating systems, can be implemented. These VMMs (sometimes alsoreferred to as hypervisors) allow for the capability of specifying thetype and versions of operating systems and applications, includingsoftware development tools that can be installed onto any virtualmachine associated therewith.

Also, once such virtual machines are created, an image of theinstallation, including the specific execution context, can be saved asa file. In Virtual PC, a product by Microsoft Corporation, this iscalled a Virtual Hard Disk (VHD). At some later time, the exact state ofthe original saved virtual machine context can be recreated from thesaved VHD file by the VMMs.

The VHD file, like any other file in a file system, can be stored in therepository that stores other software artifacts. For instance, a VHD canbe saved in any of the cache memories (e.g., 560 a-b and 550 of FIG.5A-B) that also stores input files and result files associated withrequests for software development services.

To provide a high degree of reproducibility, VHDs should exactly capturethe entire context of a software tool and invoke the tool in acompletely clean virtual machine every time it is used. A new tool forsoftware development is installed by first installing a desiredoperating system and later installing the desired tool to create thetool VHD. This tool VHD file is then stored in an associated memory forlater use. To invoke a given tool, its tool VHD file is accessed fromthe memory and installed on a VMM. This creates a tool context that isidentical every time the tool is invoked. To execute the tool, thenecessary inputs are passed to the VMM via a network connection to thehost computer, for instance. The tool processes any input files creatingresults which are passed back to the host computer, which are eventuallystored in memory. If executing the tool in the defined, context the VMMhas additional side effects, these side effects can be discarded (e.g.,Virtual PC, the undo disk is discarded), and the next time the tool isinvoked the original tool VHD will be used again. All results ofexecuting tools are explicitly passed out to the host computer after thetool executes.

FIG. 9 illustrates an overall method 900 for creating and using thereproducible execution context for executing software. At 910, at leastone virtual machine is launched through a VMM. Then at 920, a specificcontext for the virtual machine is created by installing the operatingsystem and the software development tool to be executed on the machine.Later, at 930, an image (e.g., virtual hard disk in the Virtual PC) ofthe virtual machine as configured is saved. Thus, at 940, any time laterwhen the software development tool is used to process an input file, thesaved image of the execution context (e.g., VHD in Virtual PC) isinvoked to recreate the exact context.

A further advantage of using the saved image file of the executioncontext (e.g., VHD) is that such a file also becomes an artifact thatthe cache memories (e.g., 560 a-b and 550 of FIGS. 5A-B) can store alongwith other artifacts (e.g., source files, object files, etc.). As such,the image of the execution context (e.g., VHD) can be stored using atriple for unambiguously identifying it and for later invoking suchstored execution context when needed. Furthermore, in the softwaredevelopment services context, for instance, the triple identifying theimage of the execution context can be provided as one of the argumentsfor a call by a client requester (e.g., 510 a-b of FIG. 5 A-B) to aservice provider server (520). This ensures that the result of theprocessing, if computed for the first time, is as specified in a knownexecution context and thus, also implicitly ensuring that if the resultis provided from the saved result that result too is the same as if itwas computed for the first time.

Although, the methods and systems for generating reproducible executionenvironments are described with reference to providing softwaredevelopment services over the network, the principles described thereinare not limited to that particular context. In fact, even on astand-alone machine, execution environments can be reproduced exactly asdescribed above to avoid any potential inconsistencies between executionenvironments on the same machine at different times. In fact, using themethods and systems described above, a final build for bringing togethercomponents of a software program can be implemented on a VMM with aspecific VHD. In this manner, the various components developed andinitially compiled and tested in different computers and different timescan be verified within a known execution context.

Exemplary Computing Environment

FIG. 10 and the following discussion are intended to provide a brief,general description of an exemplary computing environment in which thedisclosed technology may be implemented. For instance, any of thefunctionalities described with respect to client requesters (e.g., 510a-b), provider servers (520) and VMMs can be implemented in such acomputing environment. Although not required, the disclosed technologywas described in the general context of computer-executableinstructions, such as program modules, being executed by a personalcomputer (PC). Generally, program modules include routines, programs,objects, components, data structures, etc., that perform particulartasks or implement particular abstract data types. Moreover, thedisclosed technology may be implemented with other computer systemconfigurations, including hand-held devices, multiprocessor systems,microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, network PCs,minicomputers, mainframe computers, and the like. The disclosedtechnology may also be practiced in distributed computing environmentswhere tasks are performed by remote processing devices that are linkedthrough a communications network. In a distributed computingenvironment, program modules may be located in both local and remotememory storage devices.

With reference to FIG. 10, an exemplary system for implementing thedisclosed technology includes a general purpose computing device in theform of a conventional PC 1000, including a processing unit 1002, asystem memory 1004, and a system bus 1006 that couples various systemcomponents including the system memory 1004 to the processing unit 1002.The system bus 1006 may be any of several types of bus structuresincluding a memory bus or memory controller, a peripheral bus, and alocal bus using any of a variety of bus architectures. The system memory1004 includes read only memory (ROM) 1008 and random access memory (RAM)1010. A basic input/output system (BIOS) 1012, containing the basicroutines that help with the transfer of information between elementswithin the PC 1000, is stored in ROM 1008.

The PC 1000 further includes a hard disk drive 1014 for reading from andwriting to a hard disk (not shown), a magnetic disk drive 1016 forreading from or writing to a removable magnetic disk 1017, and anoptical disk drive 1018 for reading from or writing to a removableoptical disk 1019 (such as a CD-ROM or other optical media). The harddisk drive 1014, magnetic disk drive 1016, and optical disk drive 1018are connected to the system bus 1006 by a hard disk drive interface1020, a magnetic disk drive interface 1022, and an optical driveinterface 1024, respectively. The drives and their associatedcomputer-readable media provide nonvolatile storage of computer-readableinstructions, data structures, program modules, and other data for thePC 1000. Other types of computer-readable media which can store datathat is accessible by a PC, such as magnetic cassettes, flash memorycards, digital video disks, CDs, DVDs, RAMs, ROMs, and the like, mayalso be used in the exemplary operating environment.

A number of program modules may be stored on the hard disk 1014,magnetic disk 1017, optical disk 1019, ROM 1008, or RAM 1010, includingan operating system 1030, one or more application programs 1032, otherprogram modules 1034, and program data 1036. For instance, one or morefiles comprising instructions related to performing the methods ofproviding extensible software development services as described hereinmay be among the program modules 1034 stored in the computer-readablemedia. A user may enter commands and information into the PC 1000through input devices, such as a keyboard 1040 and pointing device 1042(such as a mouse). Other input devices (not shown) may include a digitalcamera, microphone, joystick, game pad, satellite dish, scanner, or thelike. These and other input devices are often connected to theprocessing unit 1002 through a serial port interface 1044 that iscoupled to the system bus 1006, but may be connected by otherinterfaces, such as a parallel port, game port, or universal serial bus(USB) (none of which are shown). A monitor 1046 or other type of displaydevice is also connected to the system bus 1006 via an interface, suchas a video adapter 1048. Other peripheral output devices, such asspeakers and printers (not shown), may be included.

The PC 1000 may operate in a networked environment using logicalconnections to one or more remote computers, such as a remote computer1050. The remote computer 1050 may be another PC, a server, a router, anetwork PC, or a peer device or other common network node, and typicallyincludes many or all of the elements described above relative to the PC1000, although only a memory storage device 1052 has been illustrated inFIG. 10. The logical connections depicted in FIG. 10 include a localarea network (LAN) 1054 and a wide area network (WAN) 1056. Suchnetworking environments are commonplace in offices, enterprise-widecomputer networks, intranets, and the Internet.

When used in a LAN networking environment, the PC 1000 is connected tothe LAN 1054 through a network interface 1058. When used in a WANnetworking environment, the PC 1000 typically includes a modem 1060 orother means for establishing communications over the WAN 1056, such asthe Internet. The modem 1060, which may be internal or external, isconnected to the system bus 1006 via the serial port interface 1044. Ina networked environment, program modules depicted relative to thepersonal computer 1000, or portions thereof, may be stored in the remotememory storage device 1052. The network connections shown are exemplary,and other means of establishing a communications link between thecomputers may be used.

Alternatives

Having described and illustrated the principles of our invention withreference to the illustrated embodiments, it will be recognized that theillustrated embodiments can be modified in arrangement and detailwithout departing from such principles. For instance, the functionalityof the various components of the software development services networkdescribed herein can be distributed differently among the components orother components not shown.

Elements of the illustrated embodiment shown in software may beimplemented in hardware and vice versa. Also, the technologies from anyexample can be combined with the technologies described in any one ormore of the other examples.

In view of the many possible embodiments to which the principles of theinvention may be applied, it should be recognized that the illustratedembodiments are examples of the invention and should not be taken as alimitation on the scope of the invention. For instance, variouscomponents of systems and tools described herein may be combined infunction and use. We, therefore, claim as our invention all subjectmatter that comes within the scope and spirit of these claims.

1. In a network of computers comprising one or more client requestersand one or more service providers, a method of providing softwaredevelopment services, the method comprising: receiving a softwaredevelopment service request to compile source code from one or moreclient requesters, the request comprising an indicator for specifying atleast one desired result of object code associated with the source code;and based at least in part on the request received, generatingadditional requests in response to the received request and processingthe requests to generate the object code and at least one non-specifiedresult of source code optimization in addition to the object code to bepresented to the one or more client requesters; sending to the one ormore client requesters a specified result and the non-specified result,wherein at least one of the specified result and the non-specifiedresult is obtained from cache, the specified result being a firstcompiled version of the source code and the non-specified result being asecond compiled version of the source code, different than the firstcompiled version, and wherein the specified result and non-specifiedresult are in a ranked order; the result obtained from cache beingsearched using a triple identifier that allows the result in cache to beuniquely identified using an alias, a fingerprint, and a url, whereinthe alias is a local name, the fingerprint is a unique content-basedhash, and the url is a unique address of the result, and wherein any oneof the alias, fingerprint and url can be used to retrieve the result. 2.The method of claim 1 wherein, determining the at least onenon-specified result to be presented to the one or more clientrequesters comprises generating at least one additional requestcorresponding to the at least one non-specified result.
 3. The method ofclaim 1 wherein, determining the at least one non-specified result to bepresented to the one or more client requesters is based at least in partknowledge retained from previous requests from the one or more clientrequesters.
 4. The method of claim 1 wherein, determining the at leastone non-specified result to be presented to the one or more clientrequesters comprises determining one or more software development toolsnot specified in the software development service request to be appliedto generate the at least one non-specified result.
 5. The method ofclaim 1 wherein, the request is a method call comprising arguments thatinclude an indicator of at least one input file on which the softwaredevelopment service is to be performed, and an indicator of at least onesoftware development tool to be applied in providing the softwaredevelopment service.
 6. The method of claim 5 wherein, the input filecomprises at least one source code file, the software developmentservices requested comprises at least one compilation service and thesoftware development tool to be applied comprises a compiler.
 7. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the ranking order is based at least in parton a previous use of previous results of the software developmentsservices by the client requester.
 8. A computer system having a memorystoring executable instructions for providing software developmentservices in a network, the system comprising: a service provider serverprogrammed to receive requests for providing software developmentservices including compilation of source code from one or more clientrequesters; a request processor associated with the service providerserver programmed to generate additional requests based on the requestsreceived from the client requester and based on previous requests fromthe client requester to generate results related to the compilation ofsource code in addition to those specified in the requests received fromthe client requester; and a build server associated with the serviceprovider server and the request processor for compiling the source codeand for generating at least one result based on the requests receivedfrom the one or more client requesters and at least one result based onthe additional requests generated by the request processor, the at leastone result based on the requests received being a first compiled versionof the source code and the at least one result based on the additionalrequests generated by the request processor being a second compiledversion of the source code, different than the first compiled version,wherein at least one of said results is to be obtained from cache usinga triple identifier that allows the result in cache to be uniquelyidentified by having an alias, a fingerprint, and a url, wherein thealias is a local name, the fingerprint is a unique content-based hash,and the url is a unique address of the result, and wherein any one ofthe alias, fingerprint and url can be used to retrieve the result; thebuild server further for providing the first compiled version and secondcompiled version in a ranked order.
 9. The system of claim 8, whereinthe at least one result based on the requests received from the one ormore client requesters corresponds to at least one expected resultspecified in the requests received from the one or more clientrequesters.
 10. The system of claim 9, wherein the at least one resultbased on the additional requests generated by the request processor ispresented to the one or more client requesters as unexpected results ofinterest.
 11. The system of claim 8, wherein the ranking order is basedat least in part on a previous use of previous results of the softwaredevelopments services by the client requester.
 12. The system of claim8, wherein the additional requests generated by the request processor isbased at least in part on information retained from previous requestsprocessed by the service provider server.
 13. The system of claim 8,wherein the additional requests generated by the request processorcomprise requests to apply software development tools in addition tothose specified in the requests for providing software developmentservices from the one or more client requesters.
 14. The system of claim13, wherein the request processor associated with the service providerserver is further programmed to determine the software development toolsin addition to those specified in the requests for providing softwaredevelopment services from the one or more client requesters.
 15. Thesystem of claim 8, wherein the requests for providing softwaredevelopment services from the one or more client requesters comprises amethod call to the service provider server.
 16. The system of claim 8wherein the requests for providing software development services fromthe one or more client requesters comprises a request for compiling oneor more source code files to generate one or more corresponding objectfiles.
 17. At least one computer readable memory having stored thereoninstructions to be executed by a computer for performing a method ofproviding software development services, the method comprising:receiving from one or more client requesters at least one request tocompile source code, the request comprising an indicator for specifyingat least one result, which includes object code compiled from the sourcecode; based at least in part on the at least one request received,processing one or more input files, including the source code, specifiedin the at least one request received to generate the object code;determining other software development tools that are usable on thesource code that were not in the at least one request, but can bebeneficial to the client requesters; processing the one or more inputfiles, including the source code, specified in the at least one requestusing the other software development tools that were determined togenerate the at least one non-specified result; and sending to the oneor more client requesters a first result that was requested and a secondresult that is the non-specified result, the first result being a firstcompiled version of the source code and the second result being a secondcompiled version of the source code, and wherein the first result andsecond result are in a ranked order and wherein at least one of saidresults is to be obtained from cache using a triple identifier thatallows the result in cache to be uniquely identified by having an alias,a fingerprint, and a url, wherein the alias is a local name, thefingerprint is a unique content-based hash, and the url is a uniqueaddress of the result, and wherein any one of the alias, fingerprint andurl can be used to retrieve the result.
 18. The computer readable mediumof claim 17, wherein the determining the at least one non-specifiedresult comprises determining at least one software development tool notspecified in the at least one request for providing the one or moresoftware development services.
 19. The computer readable medium of claim17, wherein the at least one request for providing one or more softwaredevelopment services comprises a request for providing compilationservices and the at least one of the one or more input files comprisessource code to be compiled.
 20. The computer readable medium of claim19, wherein generating the at least one non-specified result comprisesanalyzing the source code and applying optimizations to the source codeduring compilation, wherein the optimizations that are applied are notspecified in the at least one request for providing the one or moresoftware development services received from the one or more clientrequesters.